Making sense of it all

It was in 2000 or thereabouts that I first started to feel that the world had taken a wrong turning – a short paper called Guide for the Perplexed captured these thoughts….

The global economic crisis of 2008 just confirmed those initial feelings. It was at this stage I started the blog – using it to record notes on my readings.

 Then one day, I had the bright idea to gather the posts in one file – just to see if there was an underlying pattern which might be of wider interest…In 2015, this was a 115 page file called Ways of Seeing…the global crisis – which consisted mainly of a critique of our political and intellectual elites. But it was a couple of years later before I realised how badly served we were by most books on the crisis and when I started to develop my own annotated list of the key books – which suggested that the “crisis” actually began in the 1970s…That’s a list with almost 100 books – which you will find in Part II of Dispatches to the next generation – the short version.

As the book has developed more or less of its own accord, it is about time for it to be given some aims – against which it might better be edited. And I have not forgotten the advice I have given to authors (and publishers) about needing powerful arguments to convince us that yet another book should be inflicted upon them

So, rather belatedly, here are the reasons why I offer the book

- It puts the crisis in its proper context – social, historical and moral

- It is clearly written

- Its guided hyperlinks allow you to select the further reading which seems appropriate eg this unique list of books worth reading

- It's written by someone who understands your uncertainties and confusions

- you can use the book lists to make you appear more knowledgeable!  

Let me try to persuade you it’s worth dipping into -

PART I

I love what I imagine was the Victorian habit of giving sub-titles to their book chapters which offered explanations of what the reader might reasonably expect to find in them. And I’ve discovered that they are a good discipline for anyone trying to edit his own text……… In this next section therefore –

- An indictment is read

- Different ways of looking at the world are sketched out

- Some explanations are offered for our discord

- The scale of moral collapse and greed is exposed

- A staircase tale about the devil is recounted

- It is suggested that Management and Economics have become the new religion

- A letter to the Younger Generation is discovered

- History is revenged

Title	Tags	Bottom line?
The Indictment	Seeking the common ground	How I saw the world in 2014
Stories we tell	Frame analysis, tropes, memes,	Different ways we try to make sense of the world
Why we disagree	Wicked problems	Pity no one has yet applied frame analysis to the global economic crisis
The scale of our moral collapse	Corporations, politicians, greed, lying, growth, spying, inequality	Has human nature changed?
A Staircase Tale about the devil	Corruption, accountability	A famous Bulgarian parable
The new religion	Management, economics, faith	the high priests of the latest religion
Against technocracy	Egocentricity, universities	How ethics has been marginalised
A letter to the younger generation	Hope, mutual support, organisation	Sound dying words
The revenge of history?	Spengler, Toynbee	Explain the significance of the table used as a frontispiece

In a following post, I’ll give you a taster for the second part of the little book – which is by way of being what the academics call a “literature review” ie not just a list of books but brief comments which give a sense of what sort of value it adds to the discussion..

As I cast my critical eye over the book as a whole, I realise that although part 1 is strong on judgements, part II is probably too descriptive and insufficiently opinionated!

A New Feature for the Blog?

I have several times recently referred to the world being overwhelmed with text- let alone images.

In despair, I half-seriously suggested we needed to ration at least non-fiction books.

I’m surprised that no one has so far turned that back on me to ask why then this blog continues to inflict prose on others……I have an answer….which is that my posts are generally designed to help guide people (a) around complex subjects and (b) toward good text.
A Musing Decade put it as simply as I could – namely that few people have the length and breadth of the experience which I can claim to in a variety of roles, countries and disciplines. Both my “voice” and reading notes have developed over a 50 year period which has seen massive social changes.

The top of the blog’s right-hand column lists about 12 titles - of E-books on such subjects as “Reforming the State”; the global economic crisis; cultural aspects of Bulgaria, Germany and Romania, the 2014 Scottish Referendum, the blog’s annual collections; and, shortly, Brexit

That’s more than 3,000 pages of text – and probably about 20,000 hyperlinks – a veritable Aladdin’s Cave which lies largely untouched.

That’s why A Musing Decade talks about an amazing “resource” – developed over ten years, taking the trouble to identify appropriate links and weave them into text….more recently creating thematic collections on those subjects…

And that’s why I’m now considering what sort of changes I need to make to the blog to raise its profile so that more people can access the material. The change of name is a very minor step. The next is to draw more attention to the E-books….

So, on those days when there is no new post, I will try to select an excerpt from one of the E-books…

Watching the English

How could I be suggesting that the Brits are outspoken when the anglo-EU translation guide so clearly suggested differently? And when a new paper I had just come across argued that the very construction of the English language encourages the “hinting” habit which the guide exemplifies?

On a scale with “hinting” at one end and “direct” at the other, we can place different national conversational styles.

Hinting people often prefer not to say exactly what they mean because they’re concerned with the effect their ideas might have on those they’re talking to. Instead of coming straight to the point (“I don’t think this will work” or “I want to conclude the meeting at 4 o’clock sharp”) hinting people prefer to hint at what they’re trying to say, hoping that the other person will understand without them having to be explicit.

The British art of “Politeness” is a classic form of indirectness. We have conventions of politeness that try to make the other person comfortable by not imposing, by giving them a way out, by being friendly etc. Other cultures have more direct styles and value the directness of saying what you mean, (even quite brutally), assuming the other person will appreciate their “honest” approach.

Since the British are at the “hinting” end of the scale we can find other more direct conversational styles aggressive, rude, or even obtuse. People from more direct cultures may find the British wishy-washy, inconsistent or even misleading. Hinters can come across as unclear and indecisive, whereas Direct people can come across as pushy, rude or insensitive.

An yet everyone recognizes the adversarial nature of the English political culture – nowhere more evident than in the confrontational layout of the House of Commons debating chamber, compared with the semi-circle of the French and German chambers. And continental regimes have a long tradition of coalitions and consensual government which is almost entirely absent from the British. In that respect, however, France is closer to Britain and the French legal system is, of course, notoriously confrontational.

The same article does, however, offer an explanation for the apparent contradiction between politeness and stubbornness

No matter how “traditional” the British may appear, they are in fact fierce individualists which might surprise foreigners ….Whereas the Brits have very formal and traditional rules of conduct and etiquette that apply to the first “impersonal” stages of a relationship or more particularly to the opening stages of a negotiation, once a more informal atmosphere has been established, there are no strict rules of conduct. As a French Business Manager put it, “in France we are less formal than the Brits at the start of a relationship, but over time, we don’t tend to become as informal as the British will”.

Individualism, however. may become downright stubbornness. Because we do not feel pressured to conform to a general consensus, a Brit will have no trouble saying “No” to any point which other European negotiators argue is for the “common good”. Insularity and the Island Mentality contribute to our willingness to fight point by point to the last. Our European partners may see this as a tough approach in multi party, multi cultural negotiations. Equally we can be seen to be playing the role of the devil’s advocate. Of course, the disadvantage of this “semi-detached” attitude is that we are often underachieve in longer-term joint venture projects. A perfect example of this is the high-speed rail link between the channel tunnel and London.

I recently came across a paper called Cultures of negotiation which suggested three explanatory factors for the embarrassing mess the UK has made of the Brexit negotiations
-       the adversarial political culture which I’ve just referred to
-       the Conservative “ideology of statecraft” which views the international system as a dangerous environment, is sceptical of notions of trust and cooperation, regards power as the fundamental currency of international politics, and accordingly regards the threat of force (or the application of other forms of power) as the best way to influence other actors
-       “weak socialisation into European structures” – a reference presumably to the reluctance particularly of English MPs and UKIP MEPs to get involved in European processes…

The first Part of Richard Lewis’s When Cultures Collide – leading across cultures  has a great diagram (figure 2.2 page 20) showing how this “withdrawal” syndrome works at a psychological level...
And the triangular diagram which graces this post is also taken from the early part of the book.....

I've taken the title of my post from Kate Fox's book of that name which you can access here. It’s actually a great read – although this review (called the awkward squad) doesn’t agree – finding it too flippant. This review – from a fellow anthropologist – gives it the respect I think it deserves

The polite but awkward squad?

All countries are obviously different – but this has not stopped academics from amusing themselves with long,  intense and generally incestuous debates about a particular country’s “exceptionalism”. At one time, it was about the United States (“why has socialism never taken hold?” “Why does religion have such a hold?” – if not “how has the country become so dominant?”); at another, Germany (whose historians had a great debate in the 1980s about the “Sonderweg “ (“how did such a cultured nation land up with the Nazis?”)

Britain (no longer “great”) has long been credited with being the first to experience the Industrial Revolution and, if not to invent “democracy”, at least to bring forward the modern version of “liberal democracy”. In that sense Britain inarguably has a distinctive - if not quite “exceptional” - history.

In European Union circles, it certainly has the reputation of being an “awkward” partner which always had a “semi-detached” attitude to the continent. Although the powerful concessions it won from its partners suggested it should be the last country to leave, most people were not surprised when it embraced Brexit…

But the question I want to explore is the relatively neglected one of what exactly accounts for this “awkwardness” of behaviour – after all, the Brits are equally well known for their politeness. One argument indeed is that it is this very politeness which explains the Perfidious Albion reputation “England” at least (as the Imperial overlord) has.

But first, a personal note. In the mid-1970s I was, by virtue of my position in one of Europe’s largest Regions, exposed for the first time to the dynamics and discourse of international gatherings. And I found myself quickly being among the first to try to puncture the rhetoric of particularly my southern European colleagues. I’ll never forget the subsequent semi-ostracization I suffered at a mountain retreat in Sicily as a result of my brutal assault on what I saw as the empty discourse of the participants.

In the 1980s, by then more experienced, I was lucky enough to be a member of the British delegation in the Council of Europe – the local government section – and learned to cultivate alliances with my Dutch, French, Belgian and German colleagues……But I realised that the impatient readiness to speak one's mind was a well-known British feature – matched only by that of the Dutch.

Since de Hofstede we are all, of course, familiar with the literature on the culture of geography - whose principal exponents are de Hofstede, Trompenaars and Inglehart. Richard Lewis’s When Cultures Clash (1996) is my favourite go-to reference whenever the discussion turns to questions of cultural difference – as is Richard Nisbett’s Geography of Thought (2003) who argues that -

East Asians and Westerners perceive the world and think about it in very different ways. Westerners are inclined to attend to some focal object, analyzing its attributes and categorizing it in an effort to find out what rules govern its behavior. Rules used include formal logic. Causal attributions tend to focus exclusively on the object and are therefore often mistaken. 

East Asians are more likely to attend to a broad perceptual and conceptual field, noticing relationships and changes and grouping objects based on family resemblance rather than category membership. Causal attributions emphasize the context. Social factors are likely to be important in directing attention. East Asians live in complex social networks with prescribed role relations. Attention to context is important to effective functioning.

But it’s more recently that many of us came across this devastating Anglo-EU translation guide which takes some common phrases Brits use; how our European partners generally understand them; and what the Brits really mean by them. 
For example - when we say "very interesting", foreigners think we are impressed. What we are actually thinking is that it's a lot of nonsense!

Similarly, when we say "with the greatest respect", we are actually thinking "the man's an idiot" whereas the non-English speaker assumes that he is being listened to.

"Incidentally, by the way" actually means "this is the primary purpose of the discussion" – but is thought by the unfortunate foreigner to mean that the issue is of no significance.

For those who deal with Brits, the table is essential preparation and, who knows, sharing it with them might open up new friendships.

All this is familiar ground……..good for conversation at parties and even in many business schools. But few people bother to go beyond this and try to explore why it is that the Brits behave this way….
It is to that question I will turn in the next post….

Further reading

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/12/03/britains-naive-exceptionalism/

https://www.cer.eu/insights/british-and-their-exceptionalism

http://www.unice.fr/crookall-cours/iup_cult/_docs/_RUGM_Chapter-05.pdf

At home in one’s Past (Demos report)

Discourse Analysis of a Michael Gove speech

The British Self and Continental Other

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/why-uk-never-felt-at-home-in-eu/

French, german and British perceptions of the Turkish bid for EU membership

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/how-i-learnt-to-loathe-england

A Musing Decade

The blog will be ten years old in the autumn – making it one of the longest-running (english-speaking) blogs of its kind.  It first saw the light of day as "Carpathian Musings" because the blogging started in my mountain house in that area but, after a few winters spent in Sofia, I realized that the title was no longer a precise description of its source - and the blog has therefore, for the past 5 years or so, been called “Balkan and Carpathian Musings”.

Observant readers will have noticed that this has been replaced by a new title – “The Bookish Explorer”. 
This is an experiment – and I hope you will not be too confused by the variety of titles you will find popping up in the next few weeks..

Why am I doing this? Simply because I want to raise the blog’s profile…

Although I was delighted when the monthly click rate rose a couple of years ago to 10,000, it has reached those dizzy heights on only 3 occasions and is currently running at half that level. I consider the blog an amazing “resource” (I will come back to that word) – on issues ranging from Brexit, administrative reform, Bulgarian and Romanian culture, Germany, the 2014 Scottish Referendum, the state (see the E-books in the top right column of the blog). But neither the word "Balkan" nor "Carpathian" are keywords people use when they are googling on these subjects.....And the name indeed gives a false impression.... So I reckon the blog needs a name which better expresses its content and objectives
I realise, of course, that the way to increase the profile of a blog or website is to manipulate the algorithms – but this costs money I’m not willing to pay…

Let’s be clear, I’m not interested in raising the profile as an end in itself…..I have no illusions about my significance. But I am confident that my blog (and website) is an almost unique “resource” or, if you prefer, “library”..Not of my writing – but of the insights of others whose books and papers I’ve taken the time and trouble to seek out and whose significance I have the capacity to recognize and want to pass on……

But what exactly, I hear you ask, do I mean when I say the blog is one of the longest-running “of its “kind”? Simply that the majority of blogs specialize in a particular topic - whether EC Law, literary reviews (a popular subject), economics (ditto) or Marxist economics – more popular than you think eg Michael Robert’s or Boffy’s Blog (going since 2007) which interrupts its Marxist exegesis with comment on British politics) 
Mine darts like a butterfly to a variety of flowers as I tried to explain in a post last year in the blog’s 2018 Annual – The Search for the Holy Grail. I indeed tried to argue that my claim for the reader’s attention is based on – 

- experience in an unusual variety of sectors (and countries) – each of which is closely manned with “gatekeepers”

- the compulsion (over a 50 year-period) to record the lessons of each experience in short papers

- Long and extensive reading

- A “voice” which has been honed by the necessity of speaking clearly to audiences of different nationalities and class

- intensive trawling of the internet for wide range of writing

- notes kept of the most important of those readings

- shared in hyperlinks with readers

So bear with me as I play around with the blog name – and indeed with its content..

Narratives of Encroachment

Like most people, these days, my attention tends to wander…my eye will soon catch something else. It’s not often that an article is able to hold my attention but “Turning Inward; Brexit, Encroachment Narrative and the English as a “secret people” achieved that amazing feat…

I almost missed it since it had been lurking as one of hundreds of hyperlinks which I store in a file but rarely activate.

And my attention was held because the author – one Prof Patrick Wright - had cunningly embedded in the article a video of his presentation which made even more interesting points than the article itself. But the sound-level was so low that I had to strain my ears to identify the embellishments he was making to the text.

Truly the sort of cunning technique one would expect from a Professor of “Literature and Visual and Material Culture”!! He is also the author of On living in an old country – national past in contemporary Britain, published in 1985.

The basic argument of his paper is that English society has been portrayed over the ages by certain writers with particular themes and symbols eg rustic meadows, the sound of a cricket ball and warm beer. The gallery of writers includes William Cobbett, GK Chesterton, JB Priestley and George Orwell….each of whom, admittedly in very varying degrees, paints pictures of “sturdy yeomen” under threat…

 While the Brexit campaigns have rightly been condemned for its appeals to xenophobia, and for the lies, misrepresentations and sheer opportunism of its leaders, there is more to be said than that. To the considerable extent that this resurgence of English identity has been engineered by partisan politicians, campaigners and journalists, it has also been activated by the deployment of allegorical narratives that work by simplification and polarisation.

In these encroachment narratives, the traditional nation and its way of life is typically squared off against a vividly imagined and probably advancing threat — be it immigrants, bureaucrats, Europe, ‘experts’ etc. Where the reality addressed is likely to be complex and full of nuance, encroachment narratives of this kind press that reality into a brutally simplified and prejudged opposition between good and evil. They often defend a traditional idea of community against modern forms of society and political organisation. They tend to favour common sense and instinct over long words, abstract knowledge and expertise. They make a virtue, particularly in the English context, of insularity and shrinkage. They champion the small, the grounded and the localised, as opposed to the large and mobile sweep of internationalisation and cosmopolitanism. They are highly resistant to any possibility of compromise or synthesis between their opposed terms.

 ……….Encroachment narratives abound in the writings of William Cobbett (1763–1835), the campaigning journalist and furious defender of the beleaguered Georgian countryside, whom Raymond Williams would place among the founders of a characteristically English idea of culture, and whose name now appears as a proto-Brexiteer in blog posts. He conducted his ‘rural rides’ as the agrarian revolution proceeded in the 1820s, producing a fulminating account of England as he saw it at this moment of transition…..
As G.D.H. Cole would assert much later, Cobbett lived before it became apparent that the urbanisation and industrialisation, which Cobbett saw as entirely hellish, would eventually open new possibilities of working class politics. As it was, Cobbett raged against everything he could blame for the destruction of the traditional rural community: the Reformation, the national debt, tea drinking, decadent MPs sitting for rotten boroughs, the genteel fashion for mahogany furniture, sofas and picturesque views in which the countryside was dissociated from utility, the abolitionists (accused of being more ‘concerned’ about distant slaves than about native English labourers) and, as some of Cobbett’s admirers still struggle to accept, Jews. The list is long, varied and disconcerting, even after Cobbett has bundled up everything on it to produce the overwhelming biblical monster he named ‘the thing. 

Polarised allegories also feature strongly in the writings of G.K. Chesterton, who may well appeal to the Brexiteers not just as the author of ‘The Secret People,’ but as the man who turned being a ‘Little Englander’ into a positive virtue.

The presentation was made at a British Academy symposium and can be read with others on the British Academy website in the report European Union and Disunion – reflections on European Identity (2017) which I had downloaded some time ago without noticing the Wright contribution. But it encouraged me to activate google search and discover a Demos pamphlet from 1995 The Battle over Britain which clearly laid the basis for the subsequent Cool Britannia theme. A decade later, Gordon Brown tried in vain to get the notion of British identity taken seriously but was faced down by a wave of criticisms including the redoubtable Tom Nairn who called him The Bard of Britishness  

This is the latest of what has become quite a series of musings about what the 23 June 2016 Referendum might tell us about the sort of people the Brits are… When I then went on to ask whether novelists don’t perhaps have better insights than specialist academics, I had forgotten the debate of the mid 1990s and the later one sparked off by poor Gordon Brown. 
But it's ironic that what has tuned out so far to be the most insightful of the bunch, should have been penned by an academic - if of a rather unusual sort !

Resources for English identity

- England’s Discontents – political cultures and national identities; Mike Wayne (2018) - explores the various strands which have created the english weave over the centuries - looks very strong on theory

- The Lure of Greatness – England’s Brexit, America’s Trump; Anthony Barnett (2017) – probably the best analysis of the issue, written in Barnett’s special style which bursts with insights and references and therefore comes in at 370 pages. . Each of its 34 chapters has an almost self-explanatory title. It is one of these rare books that you realise half-way through that you need to go back and read more closely and make notes about….I received the book only in September and will devote a special post to it in the autumn

- The party politics of Englishness 2014 – a typical exploration by a political science academic of the question

- The debate on Englishness can no longer be avoided; 2012 short article

- British identity and political discourse – analysis of New Labour’s search for identity; a useful little piece from an outsider from 2010

- Priestley’s England – JB Priestley and English culture (2007) a biography of the man which looks at the society in which he became such a famous name.

- BBC Postscripts; a lovely tribute to the 1941 radio talks Priestley did in which you can hear excerpts

- Priestley’s Finest Hour; Commentary from one of the librarians of the University collection of Priestley’s works

- English Journey; JB Priestley (1936) Gives a sense of the sort of people he met as he travelled around by bus

- The secret people; GK Chesterton. The poem which was apparently used by a lot of Brexiteers

- Rural Rides; William Cobbitt (1830) an early example of a political travelogue by a great radical

Send in the Clowns

The new deadline of 31 October fixed by the EU at Wednesday night's Summit proves that the UK has indeed “lost control”..... 
John Harris, out on his illuminating Brexit travels again, visited the Prime Minister’s constituency of Maidenhead - and is left almost literally tearing his hair at one Conservative activist's refusal to moderate his charge that the Prime Minister was a "traitor"......

Recent posts have explored whether novelists or social historians have the better skill-set to make sense of what is going on these days in England’s green and pleasant land.

I had clearly forgotten about comedians – with the Little Britain characters (of a decade ago) being obvious contenders for the award of those who best exemplify the country….Except there is stiff competition from the Frankie Boyle New World Order insights – let alone the classic Basil Fawlty (of 40 years ago).

Fawlty Towers was, above all, an ensemble piece about isolation. It was a portrait of rage and frustration, an exploration of the impotence that results when the world as we wish it to be is so agonisingly at odds with the world as it is.

It was the Brexit mindset incubating in the shabby surroundings of a down-at-heel hotel that had seen far better days.What is Basil Fawlty, beyond the proprietor of this macabre hotel? Well, he is a snob, for starters: in the first ever episode, "A Touch of Class", he abruptly reverses his customary hostility on learning that a prospective guest is a lord, clearly hoping that a visiting toff will magically improve the hotel’s social standing (one of his first conversational gambits is to rave to Lord Melbury about the properties of fields of wheat, which may perhaps have stuck somewhere in Theresa May’s psyche). 

A man of somewhat mysterious origins, Basil Fawlty is acutely class conscious, at once mistrustful of the working classes and a Labour party that he sees as encouraging their propensity for industrial action, and anxious about his own lack of social status. Professionals – experts, one might say – frighten him; rules and regulations intimidate him; the need to ingratiate himself to foreigners infuriates him. 

The put-upon Spanish waiter, Manuel, is, for Basil, there to receive a last kick – usually up the backside – from imperial Britain. He is another outsider to be pushed, prodded, poked and communicated with through a loudhailer. But the British empire to which Basil wants to return is already a thing of the past; the world more complicated than his blinkered mind can admit. Watch Fawlty’s visceral horror as young people flaunt their sexuality, as the common people dare to holiday in sedate Torquay, and – in a moment that causes Fawlty to literally jump in disbelief – the NHS is staffed by doctors who are black.

Basil’s most celebrated meltdown comes, of course, when he is confronted with a touring group of well-to-do, articulate, friendly Germans. His psyche splits: he knows he must be welcoming, but cannot find the mental space or language that allows him to forget the second world war…….
 If only we had picked up that Basil – far from being a glimpse into the past – was a snapshot of the future, we might have been able to do something about it.

For the more cerebral amongst us, however, there is another, equally hallowed and longer running, series which captured the belief system at the heart of this blessed land – Yes Minister – which graced our television screens for most of the 1980s. There indelibly is Perfidious Albion in drag – the foibles of the political class exposed for all to see

What we didn’t know at the time was that the brilliant creator of the series – Anthony Jay – had based his script on the theories of the “public choice” economists who promulgated the view that all “public servants” were serving….their own interests…..

In  other words, the series was laying the ground for the neoliberal doctrine which has led to such cynicism about politics….(the last link is to a powerful short article supporting this thesis)

Despite this, I am a great admirer of Anthony Jay’s work which encompassed some great non-fictions books. “Management and Machiavelli” (1969) enthused me no end (I was battling a traditional bureaucracy at the time) - and he “almost single-handedly resurrected the academic study of that 15^th century genius. And Jay followed it up with an equally brilliant book – “Corporation Man” – based on his observations of the BBC…… His talents even extended to tossing off elegant guides to running an effective meetings! Indeed some of my more regular readers will know that I have been known to use his “Democracy, Bernard, it must be stopped” when discussing the workings of the political class. For my money, the article can’t be bettered…

I once found an edited transcript to the entire Yes Minister series which I left behind in Sofia but was delighted to find the entire work here for my permanent perusal!

Update

The role of the comic or jester in politics seems to be in the air these days since there were a couple of learned discussions of the issue this month – on both sides of the Atlantic. First, the NYR Daily gave us this nice walk down Memory Lane - What Koestler knew about jokes

William Davis is a very serious policy wonk whose The Funny Side of Politics also came to my attention only after this post. It surprised me in making no reference to Arthur Koestler who famously explored the dynamics of the joke in 1949 in the first part of Insight and Outlook – an inquiry into the common foundations of science, art and social ethics and updated his thoughts in The Act of Creation, (1964) devoting 100 pages to an exposition on The Jester. It mist have been the second book that I read in the 1960s and remember being bowled over by it.

His approach continues to attract attention as can be seen in this nice comparison with Bergson a few years back and this rather more ponderous  25 page analysis of his theory from the 1980s  

And, while we’re on the subject of politics as entertainment, let’s not forget Neil Postman’s brilliant Amusing Ourselves to Death; (1985) and Jerry Mander’s Four Arguments for the elimination of television;  (1978).

LRB also gave us a few years ago this great overview of the English satiric tradition - Sinking into the Sea - which took as its cue a little book entitled "The Wit and Wisdom of Boris Johnson" edited by Harry Mount